wrestrepo

Interesting article from Autoblog, although they don't really answer the question IMO.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/09/w...rmance-engine/

MMike1981

The turbo/RDX is a sleeper performance machine with incredible power and surprising acceleration at all legal speeds. Stiff ride, perfect steering, the first RDX was never intended to rouse the feathers of Lexus, but at the time, it did what it was supposed to do, undercut and outperform the X3. Mission accomplished. The RDX performance is still relevant today and still bests almost everything on the market, even new models. Thats massive, and quite the tribute to the cancelled turbo powerplant (MPG and other feelings aside). The engine is and will be special, even in its application to an SUV. Too bad Honda has not chosen to use it elsewhere, its highly under-rated in the power it generates, and obviously, not used anywhere in Acura or Honda lines. This engine, if put into a TSX or any Honda model, would blow the doors off so much of the competition, its frankly surprising its not been used. One major and hypothetical reason why, would be the damaging MPG #'s and lack of 6 speed implementation to Hondas lines, past lines at least. Although, with less weight to pull, and better tuning, possibilities sound endless for the RDX motor. Its a shame.

Boostin'

Having owned other cars with factory boosted (both turbo and S/C's) engines in the past, that turbo 4, along with the handling ability (including SH-AWD), were the main reasons for my own RDX purchase. Guess all that is gone with the new model; I'll be a one time only Acura owner it now seems.

tone4488

RDX TURBO!! :o or MDX TURBO

mrgold35

Maybe Comptech might get going again and offer a supercharger for the 3.5L engine since so many Acuras (and Hondas) have it. The old 3.2L S/C for the TL made 60-65HP extra HP at the wheels. I haven't seen anything new from them in about 5 years.

http://www.ct-engineering.com/

A 2013 RDX with a S/C making 330-340hp with 27-28mpgs might make me forget about 270hp 2.3L I-4 Turbo with Hondata.

wrestrepo

Perhaps the engine was packaged in the wrong vehicle. I wonder how successful it would have been in the TSX or even the TL

swannyva

My one word guess would be - noise. We enjoy our RDX, but the 4 is characteristically loud.

John

DateTSX

It's a shame Honda didn't bother to update it during its 6 year run. But no surprises there, the NSX was on the market for 15 years w/o any major changes. The GTR had more engine tweaks since it came out that you'll regret buying it because you wonder what the following year will have. And I hate Honda product life cycle. They introduce a product, have it sit for 3-4 years give it a mid-life cycle mild makeover, make a huge deal about the 3hp improvement and have it sit again for another couple years before the redesign. It’s like they don’t want to spend any money except for the first year. Mark my words, the new ILX and RDX will go through it life w/o any major changes until its either gets redesign or killed. Its madness! Give us a V8, add more gears in your transmission, bring over the diesel motor and make a RWD model! Hell, everything I mention Hyundai or KIA them!

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

its because its an Asian company.


Shit my asian mom always says:
"Justin, why you go out to eat? Save money, eat at home."

DateTSX

I agreed with you on that but Nissan also an Asian company.

kidfury

i really do love the turbo aspect of my rdx as a sporty suv. I'll be driving my rdx for a few more years after that...

BigHatch

"Why did Honda kill its best performance engine?"

...because they're idiots.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

some are more tight than others!
I'm sure Nissan cuts cost somewhere else.

interiors

pickler

Cause someone from Honda slept with the devil.

JCRDX11

I am sure you mean reliability.

justnspace

iTrader: (1)

LOL, same difference.

Ken1997TL

Right engine for the wrong demographic. It should have been equipped with a manual in a coupe.

JCRDX11

A coupe TSX with the turbo engine would have been nice since of the wagon IMO.

jcl78

Lots of misinformation in those comments, as well as a lot of ignorant people.
Comments like "akwardly balanced pig machine" for the RDX, yeah, they have never driven one, or for that matter any of the people stating "right engine wrong car" The RDX is a fantastic corner carver, SH-AWD overdriving the outside wheel. I can induce oversteer with throttle. It is a nice riding, quick as all get out especially up here in high altitude. Do most buyers want that type of car? no. Do enthusiasts want this car? yes. Acura will sell a ton of boring 2013 RDXs though, to equally boring people.

corduroygt

No, it's a french-japanese company. For our topic, Honda could have easily developed the 2.3T engine with DI and got the same or better mileage than the V6, but they're cheap and did not want to develop an engine for 10-15k sales a year.

DRR98

..."but they're cheap and did not want to develop an engine for 10-15k sales a year."

Understandable though, even more so at this time.

Japan's economy has been down like 4 flat tires since before 2000.

Then add the triple disasters.

Yeah, I'm guessing they are happy to just be making and selling anything to help raise quick cash.

True a 2.3T w/DI would have been sweet.

? 300hp 300tq 20/30mpg...?

Will losing the turbo and SH-AWD make the leftover new and the used RDX's market value go up?

jcl78

I think the 2013 RDX will help the value of the first gen RDX.

Once magazines and real people get to drive the real thing, I think there will be several comments like:

The 2013 RDX rides nice and compliant, with a smooth feel over most roads. Throw it into a corner though and body roll makes itself known, making the sporting nature of the first gen RDX something we long for.

I think they will also comment how the linear power curve of the new bland V6 saps any remaining sporting character.

Now, that will be great for A to B type buyers.

mrgold35

One thing I like about the current RDX is the turbo engine (+ Hondata) and high altitude driving. I travel between 5000-9,000 feet in NM and above 11,000 feet in Colorado. The RDX leaves a lot of cars and SUVs behind with the turbo engine when traveling up those steep grades.

The 3.5L V-6 may not hang with the current 2.3L Turbo in those conditions.

DRR98

mrgold,

When pushing it at high elevations do you see any increase in coolant temp?

So far in our nearly one year of driving the RDX we have not done much spirited driving above 5k'.


We have pushed the car through mid level elevation mountain passes though, and not seen much rise in engine coolant temps.


So far our highest coolant temp in the RDX has been ~ 207 deg.

It heats up quick but seems to dissipate heat very well at the high end.

Unlike our vert - which gets hot (engine & trans) in spirted mountain driving.

350 deg oil is literally not cool.

mrgold35

To tell the truth, I haven't notice. I will select the coolant temp the next time I hit the high altitudes. I also have the front spoiler and Eibach springs, don't know if that helps or hurts air flow. I do have hondata and the speed limit is 75mph in AZ/CO/NM/UT and 80 mph in TX by El Paso (I set the cruise around 5-7 above the limit). We also have very low humidity in the southwest, I think that helps with keeping things cool. I might see different temp results than you with these little changes.

One problem I’m notices with my 5 ½ year old TSX with +85,000 miles is my radiator fins are all bent up from road debris at the lower opening restricting air flow a little bit. My temp gauge was around ¼ when new; now it shows about 1/3 all the time.

Could your RDX have the same problem?

pickler

87mph is bad bad for fuel economy. Must keep tach below 2.5k rpm if u want 26-27mpg highway. I have scangauge ii and ignition timing suffers above 2.5k rpm but at 80+ mph radiator temps fall significantly from 90'c to around 78'c. Ign timings were 19-22 at 80mph and 24-26 at 70mph if that helps.

mrgold35

Can't help cruising at +80 mph. We are pretty much 4-8 hrs away from anywhere in the southwest. I've only came close to 26-27 mpg when I drove about 60-65 mph on the more rural roads.

I can save almost an hour driving 570 miles from Albuquerque, NM, to Las Vegas, NV, if I set the cruise to 83 mph compared to 70 mph (cars are still passing me at 83 mph). It saves me an hour and it only cost me an extra $7 or 2 gallons of gas (20 mpg@83mph compared to 22 mpg@70mph).

DRR98

Our limit here is 65mph on freeways and 70mph on I-5.

Ha, must be nice to cruise 87mph legally.

Our '11 RDX has no temp problems, I was refering to our '98 vert, that motor makes quite a bit of heat in spirited mountain driving.

Bottom fed rad/cond and they did repave nearby recently. Thanks, I'll take a close look. Wish I had a lift.

As far as road trip ride choice - the vert is a 2nd stringer to the RDX most of the time. (nice dd though)

mrgold,

Looking forward to seeing your shared info, with yours having HD it may run hotter under load (spirited mountain driving).

Why drive an RDX if you are concerned about fuel economy?

CR-V = mpg ~ boring

mau108

I think the 2.3 turbo coupled with SH-AWD would have been perfect in the TSX. Compete with the Subaru Legacy, IS250AWD, C300 4Matic, 328XI etc...

Honda needs to find new engineers.

jcl78

Hahah, more "right engine, wrong car" lol.

I love that the 2.3 was only in the RDX. I wanted the RDX, not a sedan, I wanted more ground clearance for winter, still handles sharply and is fun to drive in the dry. I wanted more storage for taking trips or hauling stuff when I need to.

The RDX is a wonderful blend of all of those things. RIP first gen.

I personally think if they would have put the 2.3 in a smaller chassis, it would be swappable into Honda hatches and it would be a huge target for thieves, you couldn't own one, at least not for long.

Zippercat

Anybody ever seen anything regarding EPA issues for this engine? Perhaps it's hard to make it comply with tighter air pollution regs in the future?

silverrevlis

After having this car for 2 months so far, my wife still grins from ear to ear when it comes time to merge into traffic! Only gripe she has is that if she needs to take off rather briskly (and uneventfully) if her lane ends after a stop light the RDX will partially light the tires up in 1st and 2nd with traction control on. She actually told me a couple of days ago that she is sometimes afraid to push the pedal down all the way while already moving because she has to fight the steering wheel a bit....I then proceeded to explain torque steer to her and the fact that she was used to a Honda Fit!

pickler

do you have the FWD rdx? steering is one of the best honda made with the exception of the s2000 steering probably. i have 0 torque steer.

silverrevlis

Yes, it is a FWD. The steering and handling even with only FWD and being a small SUV is really surprisingly good. Its got torque steer, but I have seen way worse!!

BigHatch

on ramp must be uphill too i bet

Rotary Rocket

Total shame Honda abandoned this motor. I think it has huge potential.

It is not a matter of "wrong motor in the wrong car", rather Honda missing the mark in NOT using this motor in additional applications such as TSX, Civic Type R, etc. (as stated).

They really missed out on this one, I hope they bring it back.

We did an extensive study to put this motor in a TSX for track use but unfortunatly could not mate it up to the 6 speed manual tranny.

Freaking bean counters...

BTW, the NSX was just an engineering exercise. Honda lost money on every single NSX they sold. So you see they do have passion, it is just mis-guided for now on the turbo 4!

buzzdsm

I think Honda realized that softer and quieter will sell better. Most people will look at the performance, which stays similar , the mpg improvement, a quieter ride, etc.

The RDX has a very high female ownership percentage. I'll let others figure it what this means when you redesign a car.